|
Poster:
|
SomeDarkHollow |
Date:
|
December 23, 2010 11:45:30am |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: hey cliff |
From Cliff's post back in January 2010:
The parenthetical numbers are my scores for those shows. Its a 100 point scale based on the system Robert Parker, Clive Coates, the Wine Spectator Magazine and others use for rating wines. Its based on the performance with the sound quality of the available files factored in. I find rating shows by (5) stars to be too restrictive. Of course it's purely subjective...
98-100 pts
An extraordinary show of profound and complex character displaying all the attributes expected of a classic show. These are "the best of the best". Profound musicianship and jamming, a thrilling setlist, and perfect or near perfect sound quality. Shows of this caliber are worth a special effort to find, download, own, and consume!
96-98 pts
An outstanding show of exceptional complexity and character. Absolutely must own shows. The playing/jamming is performed at an extremely high-level. The sound quality is excellent by the standards of the period, however minor sonic anomalies (hiss) or cuts may be present. In short, these are phenomenal shows!
94-96 pts
An excellent show. High-level playing/jamming, but perhaps with some lapses or inconsistencies. Shows may contain some sonic anomalies, however they are still easily enjoyable. These are shows that you absolutely must hear, and most aficionados will still wish to collect.
92-94 pts
Well above average shows, definitely worth the listen and likely a download as well. There may be some moments of brilliance, but perhaps marred by significant sonic issues or lapses/inconsistencies in playing.
90-92 pts
Barely above average to very good for the period displaying various degrees of finesse and flavor as well as character. The set-lists and playing may not be entirely inspiring, sonic annoyances may detract somewhat from the listening experience, but these shows still provide enjoyment!
89-90 pts
An average show with little distinction except that it is competently played. In essence, a straightforward, innocuous show.
This post was modified by SomeDarkHollow on 2010-12-23 19:45:30
|
Poster:
|
Cliff Hucker |
Date:
|
December 23, 2010 03:53:19pm |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: hey cliff |
"Do you have a kind of checklist you're listening for, or is it impressionistic, or both?"
No checklist, it's purely impressionistic. I factor in the setlist and sound quality, but it's weighted more heavily towards the playing and musicianship. Shows like 6/24/70 and 11/8/70 still garner perfect scores in spite of their sonic deficiencies. A show such as 4/16/78 I will score fairly high based on its brilliant sound quality.
Obviously there is little separating a 99+ and 100 point score, it's purely subjective! Each listening experience is slightly different. Reviewing shows will always be a work in progress for me. Many scores will change slightly from time to time. It's just like Robert Parker says of older wines, "there are no great wines, just great bottles."
|
Poster:
|
AltheaRose |
Date:
|
December 23, 2010 09:33:41pm |
|
Forum:
|
GratefulDead
|
Subject:
|
Re: hey cliff |
Subjective, eh? So you could change your mind! Let us know when you run into a great bottle of '85. (I'd say '95, but I think someone would have to clonk you on the head with the bottle for that to happen.)
Hope your holiday is a 100. Or at least a 97+ :-)
TVNews
OpenLibrary